39 replies to this topic

[Liam]

Here is a suggestion of simplified but still logical heat management (Partially BT based, mostly are from logical aspect)

Basic stuff (Engine/Weapons):
> Maximum heat capacity on a stripped mech (10 HS) is about 30 heat pts (Constant value).
> Heat sinks cool other stuff (- heat pts / sec).
> Base heat sinks (10HS) cool only reactor, electronics and actuators.
> Heat sinks are on the place and cools stuff which are placed in same section.
> Mech movement decreases to 20% at 80% heat cap. (Absolute movement minimum: 20%)
...Example: Mech movement decreases to 50% at 50% of heat cap etc..
> Moving mech generates relative low heat, the faster you go the more heat generation (heat pts / sec + speed depending modifier)
> Jump Jets generate heat. The more JJ you have, the more heat you will generate (heat pts / sec + JJ amount modifier).

> More than 10 heat pts generation (by energy weapons) in one specific section (arm, torso) increase rate of total heat generation > heat bar rise faster (modifier)
> Additional heat sinks around engine (in torso) increase maximum heat capacity (modifier)
> Additional heat sinks near energy weapons (same section) increase rate of total cooling > heat bar rise slower (modifier)

Heat level critical (operation in critical heat level above 90% of the heat cap):
> Operation in critical level above 90% of the heat cap induces the increase of RNG based weapon (energy weapons) failure
...(the more time you spend in overheated mode the more RNG chance of weapon failure / is the heat level bellow 90 % of the cap > RNG weapon failure is off)
...[heat depending RNG modifier].
> Heat level beyond 130 % of heat capacity induces reactor overload > nice explosion.
> Basically no ammunition explosion (Except in torsos: by operation of large energy weapons near to ammunition pods)

Override:
> Allows pilot to control the mech.
> Without override mech goes shutdown at heat level above 90% of the heat cap, after warning and ~1,5 sec.

Flush Pod:
> Full flush for maximum heat of ~100 pts.
> Mechanic of MW.
> Sound of MW3.
> Flushing should be good visible in these locations where heat sinks are mounted
...CT, LT, RT + eventually arms , and off cause on the rear of the mech (steam should go down to prevent heat signature)
> Heat signature during flushing is increased (cloud signature)

Heat signature (IR):
> Increases, especially on outlet of the weapons with rising heat level (modifer)
> Rear signature is 20 - 60 % higher due to placed heat sinks in the back of the mech

[Dlardrageth]

For the record - I'm against any type of coolant flush. It's not like you can push the magic "triple fire rate" button for your ballistic weapons, so where's balance there? Too much of an easy "I win"-button for energy weapons for my likings.

Also I would prefer the 50pt heat scale of BT. Bigger spread allows for more variety in punitive efects. But that's ofc only me.

[Liam]

Dlardrageth, in my suggestion heat capacity scales with amount of heat sinks around the engine
As example: if a heat cap of stripped mech (10HS) is around 30, with 10 HS more (in torso) it will be 50 and so on ...
something with:
Heat cap: 30 hpts + 2 hpts per heat sink (in torso).

Numbers are only for orientation. The more heat sinks you get in your torsos, the higher your heat cap will be. This should be off cause balanced around heat sinks space value (crit.). At this point if weapon slot system is similar to MW4 and equipment slot system to MW3 this should be okay. So some kind of maximum will appear.

Quote

Also I would prefer the 50pt heat scale of BT. Bigger spread allows for more variety in punitive efects. But that's ofc only me.

There is no reason why mech with only base heat sinks should have same amount of heat cap as another one with 10 heat sinks more.
The better the cooling of your engine is the faster same amount of energy can be generated, and this is actually represented in BT as heat level. However the BT heat model is very simplified because of its coupling.

I would be also happy with MW3 flush mechanic. The whole balance should be achieved as a whole, there are still weapons heat levels that could have also a big influence on the game. MW4 flush showed its effectiveness. This imply an optimum in the flush system between additional liquid mass and its tactical advantage.

Edited by Liam, 15 January 2012 - 06:39 AM.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

Coolant flush should follow the rules - only available if you fit Coolant Pods which take up weight and crits.

[Dlardrageth]

Nik Van Rhijn, on 16 January 2012 - 03:05 AM, said:

Coolant flush should follow the rules - only available if you fit Coolant Pods which take up weight and crits.

Which still would leave the issue of balancing, in particular with an eye on time scaling. MWO won't be round-based, so we need a time factor for the flush mechanics included, and would that be a fixed one? Or a variable one depending on what factors exactly?

Also in canon they are distinctively labeled "experimental", so that indicates barely beyond prototype stage. Which means there is no compelling reason for PGI to include them into the game. (Let's don't worry about past MW games having them, not exactly an issue as they weren't really close to canon for the most part, not an argument for them.) It would just introduce another element into the game that poses balancing problems, adds more (with doubtful value) complexity to heat mechanics and is, if you insist on sticking close to canon, integrated on how many canon Mechs by default in 3049 exactly?

The variable/dynamic heat scale Liam suggested, depending on the HS mounted could work, sure. I can see and agree how such a little extra layer of complexity might be beneficial. (Complexity in itself isn't bad in a game, as long as it doesn't go totally overboard, IMHO.) But balancing-wise it offers too easy a solution for mainly energy weapon based Mechs to use up spare tonnage with no negative effects. For ballistics weapons there would be no equivalent. As just loading extra ammo ups the risk of ammo explosions considerably. There might be the main argument for staying witha "fixed" heat scale, in order to make just dumping as many HS as possible on a given Mech less attractive.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

Personally I agree with you that there should be no coolant flush, I was quoting someone else and accept that it was wrong. As for the heat, I like the expanded Solaris VII scale and feel that that could be implimented with whatever time slicing PGI put in. The times for weapons recharge could be taken as well. I feel one "balancing" effect for energy weapons rarely considerd is how long between shots. Making ammo dependant weapons fire faster is no solution unless ammo quantities vary. The other thing is customisation. Not only in implimenting the time and cost of the work. I feel that all theoretically available Level 2 tech may not be available at launch. Munchkinization would be reduced if you can't fit your XL engine, double heat sinks etc. Firing energy weapons should cause an immediate heat spike which then takes time to dissipate. Just making proper penalties for heat build up and perhaps increasing the time it takes to be lost would make a big difference.

Edited by Nik Van Rhijn, 17 January 2012 - 02:11 AM.

[VYCanis]

what about if you could damage heatsinks without necessarily going through all the armor first?

I mean think about it. Logically, not all equipment can be protected equally by armor. Some stuff needs to be closer to the surface of a mech than others just by virtue of how it works, ala sensor bits, AMS systems, jump jet exhaust ports, and heatsinks, compared to say ammo, engine, gyro, masc, weapons or what have you.

So if heatsinks could potentially be popped before you even start digging into internals, it puts a bit more fragility on normally super fridge mechs. Suddenly that novacat or whatever has to be much more mindful of the damage he's taking, because though he might not have ammo to detonate, those heatsinks are gonna be the first thing to go once the excrement hits the fan, and could leave him horribly undersinked by the end of a particularly hairy fight even if there was no location blow throughs

Edited by VYCanis, 16 January 2012 - 12:02 PM.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

And the better crit seeking ability of ammo based weapons gives then an advantage/

[Strum Wealh]

My opinion is that weapons in general and energy weapons in particular could be balanced by using the canon heat values (for all weapons, equipment, and movement) and canon heat dissipation values (which works out to 0.1 heat/second for a standard heat sink or 0.2 heat/second for a double heat sink, with heat dissipation for both heat sink types being doubled if and only if the 'Mech is completely submerged in water), no coolant flush (exceptions being if and only if a (non-expended) coolant pod is equipped or the 'Mech is connected to a coolant truck (assuming either is ever implemented) - coming at the cost of weight and space for the former and mobility for the latter), no "no heat" option for servers (because if it's there, any server that wants a significant number of players on a regular basis will be essentially forced to have it on or lose players to those that do) and a system mirroring canon heat effects (as described in Total Warfare):

Quote

At 5, 10, 15, 20 and 25 heat points, subtract the number indicated from the ’Mech’s Walking MP. For example, at anywhere from 5 to 9 heat points, subtract 1 from the ’Mech’s Walking MP. Remember that Running MP is 1.5 times the current Walking MP; if the Walking MP is reduced, the player must also recalculate his ’Mech’s Running MP, rounding fractions up.

-----

At 8, 13, 17 and 24 heat points, add the number indicated to the ’Mech’s base to-hit number for weapon attacks. For example, at 8 heat points, add 1 to all base to-hit numbers for as long as the heat remains at or above 8. As with movement, these effects are not cumulative, and disappear when heat build-up is reduced.

-----

At 14, 18, 22, 26 and 30 heat points, a ’Mech attempts to shut down its power plant automatically as a safety procedure. Until the MechWarrior restarts the reactor, the ’Mech is shut down.

When the heat drops below 14 on the Heat Scale, the power plant restarts automatically, even if the pilot is out of action.

A MechWarrior can override the power plant’s safety shutdown procedure, as indicated by the Avoid number listed with the effect, though shutdown cannot be avoided at 30 or more heat points.

-----

If the heat level reaches or exceeds an Ammo Explosion threshold of 19, 23, or 28 heat points, the ammunition a ’Mech carries may explode.

Exploding weapons and their ammunition (such as Gauss rifles), as well as all single-shot weapons, do not explode from overheating.

The first set of effects would be easy enough to implement - as the 'Mech gets progressively hotter, mobility (both speed and turn rates) is gradually decreased.

The second set of effects could be implemented as representing a combination of the weapons' aim points "jumping around" slightly off from the main reticle as a result of spasms of the 'Mech's musculature as the myomers and their control systems react to being overheated (with the "jumping around" gradually increasing and fire becoming more inaccurate - which becomes more pronounced as range increases - as the 'Mech gets progressively hotter) and the pilot's vision "swimming" and giving the player a muddled and distorted view of the cockpit and the world beyond.

The third effect could be implemented as shutdown notices issued when the 'Mech is at (or above) the indicated heat levels for an extended period (say, 10 seconds) with varying timers (set as a function of the 'Mech's heat level at the time the shutdown notice is given and started at the point at which the shutdown notice is given) to initiate the override sequence - unavoidable and with no timer at 30 heat points, a 0.5-second timer at 26 heat points, a 1.0-second timer at 22 heat points, a 1.5-second timer at 18 heat points, and a 2.0-second timer at 14 heat points (for example).

Finally, the fourth effect could be implemented as (for example) a 25% chance of ammo explosion at or above 19 heat points, gradually increasing to a 50% chance of ammo explosion at or above 23 heat points, gradually increasing to a 75% chance of ammo explosion at 28 heat points or above.

With all of the above in place, an environment should be created wherein

• "energy weapon boats" are still possible to build and still have some benefits, but they require much greater skill and care to be effective in combat,
  
• the utility and effectiveness of "ballistics boats" and "missile boats" are both increased and balanced relative to the comparable-range/role "energy boats", but each also require greater care and skill to operate effectively (due to the much greater weight and bulk of the weapons (usually necessitating trade-offs in armor, speed, and/or equipment) and the need to carry multiple tons of highly-explosive ammo),
  
• well-designed mixed-weapon 'Mechs (TRO and TRO-esque builds) maximize the best and minimize the worst of equipping each class of weapon,
  
• poorly-designed mixed-weapon 'Mechs maximize the worst and minimize the best of equipping each class of weapon,
  
• alpha-strikes in all but the coolest-running 'Mechs ("boats" or otherwise) become a very high-risk (and thus, potentially, appropriately rare) yet potentially high-return action, and
  
• heat and heat-to-firepower-to-mobility management become an extremely important set of skills (as much or more so than aim and reflexes (which, IMO, is as it should be in a MW/BT game), and much more so than seems to have been the case in previous MW titles).

Your thoughts?

[Konrad]

If the tech is present given the time frame in which MWO takes place then it should be there as long as it follows the rules. Just like everything else.

[Dlardrageth]

Konrad, on 16 January 2012 - 09:09 PM, said:

If the tech is present given the time frame in which MWO takes place then it should be there as long as it follows the rules. Just like everything else.

In case of the coolant pods it is debatable if it actually is according to canon. You don't expect something specifically labeled "experimental" to be found in many line units, if any.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

In the same way you can't expect the rest of the new tech ie XL engines, double heatsinks to be readily available. Also most armies don't allow grunts to "customise" their mechs to any great extent. Also it is "canon" that a mech cannot fire multiple weapons at a target and necessarily have them even hit the mech, let alone have them all hit at the same point.

[Liam]

I would miss coolant flush ... at least I would like to see it as experimental coolant pod (something for experimental tech topic)

Edited by Liam, 17 January 2012 - 06:21 PM.

[Dlardrageth]

Nik Van Rhijn, on 17 January 2012 - 02:19 AM, said:

In the same way you can't expect the rest of the new tech ie XL engines, double heatsinks to be readily available. Also most armies don't allow grunts to "customise" their mechs to any great extent. Also it is "canon" that a mech cannot fire multiple weapons at a target and necessarily have them even hit the mech, let alone have them all hit at the same point.

Exactly. One (or rather the devs) need to keep any eye out, to not turn MWO into a game that has no real basis any more in BT/MW. We had that already once with Micr0soft, and didn't that end well... oh yeah?

I'm not even completely opposed to have the coolant pods in game at all. But... make them true to their experimental status a "rare" item. Only obtainable by massive LP trade-in or via salvage. And then make it a one-use item. Which is gone after being used in a battle. With that kind or rarity it will be true to its "experimental" denomination. And not entail the risk of unbalancing the whole heat mechanic. Also a downside like a basic malfunction chance might be good to balance it a bit more. Considering its experimental state, it could as well be a dud as a major boon in combat.

Edited by Dlardrageth, 18 January 2012 - 06:28 AM.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

More to the point if hit they explode like ammo.

[DEVASTATOR]

Sounds too complicated to me. Heat sinks cooling only locally? What if they don't build the mechlab in a way that you can fit a het sink in your arm? technically, a heat sink works universally across a substrate. If you have alarge plate of steel and put a heat sink in a corner its still going to release heat and cool the entire plate with slight variations across the plate (provided its reasonably evenly heated of course).

I think a heat sink should be a heat sink and work the same way no matter where you put it. You can inject a whole lot of complicaiton into the game which makes it harder to play (not everyone wants to spend their days in the mech lab instead of piloting) and might even affect game performance substantially.

As for the affect of heat I liked some of the past effects (MW4 as an example) whereby as the heat moved up the scale the instruments would loose focus. Perhaps targetting takes more time or JJ's don't go as high or similar performance hits. Not majorly impacting (you don't want the game almost unplayable at 90% of max heat) but enough to be an annoyance. Nothing wrong with coolant flushing where there's a fixed amount (I think MW3 had about 2 1/2 shots worth) that you have to manage wisely. Ammo explosions? Sure but what's the equivalent for energy weapons to even it out?

[Liam]

DEVASTATOR, on 18 January 2012 - 07:52 AM, said:

Sounds too complicated to me. Heat sinks cooling only locally? What if they don't build the mechlab in a way that you can fit a het sink in your arm? technically, a heat sink works universally across a substrate. If you have alarge plate of steel and put a heat sink in a corner its still going to release heat and cool the entire plate with slight variations across the plate (provided its reasonably evenly heated of course).

I think a heat sink should be a heat sink and work the same way no matter where you put it. You can inject a whole lot of complicaiton into the game which makes it harder to play (not everyone wants to spend their days in the mech lab instead of piloting) and might even affect game performance substantially.

This is theory. In the praxis there big differences between thermal conductivity of the parts. This is how engineering works actually, you try to reject or to use your heat losses effectively. So the heat flux should go through to your heat sinks as effective as possible and some parts shouldn't be heated up at all, thats why at high heat losses you would need cooling fluid feed through a pipe around your equipment, thats how its works. And if the heat flux is to high you would like to use a heat pipe, because it allows even more heat flux transport without almost touching other parts.

So some parts of machine should be cooled or prevented from undesired heat fluxes to hold these parts under specific temperature so you would like to place them with highest heat resistance to the hot parts.
Some parts are intended to have highest heat conductivity to allow the highest heat transfer and then heat dissipation with heat sink with heat convection (or radiation ...)

You wont bend a heat pipe through a arm joint ... because in engineering case it is simpler to place a heat sink on the arm directly ... the less the way from heat source to heat sink the better it is for the mech.

Actually this model (also BT) is really simplified, because of energy /heat coupling.

Edited by Liam, 18 January 2012 - 02:37 PM.

[Listless Nomad]

VYCanis, on 16 January 2012 - 11:59 AM, said:

what about if you could damage heatsinks without necessarily going through all the armor first?

I mean think about it. Logically, not all equipment can be protected equally by armor. Some stuff needs to be closer to the surface of a mech than others just by virtue of how it works, ala sensor bits, AMS systems, jump jet exhaust ports, and heatsinks, compared to say ammo, engine, gyro, masc, weapons or what have you.

So if heatsinks could potentially be popped before you even start digging into internals, it puts a bit more fragility on normally super fridge mechs. Suddenly that novacat or whatever has to be much more mindful of the damage he's taking, because though he might not have ammo to detonate, those heatsinks are gonna be the first thing to go once the excrement hits the fan, and could leave him horribly undersinked by the end of a particularly hairy fight even if there was no location blow throughs

This was described numerous times in the novels and makes a lot of sense. I vote wholeheartedly for this. Too many times it feels like "armor" on mechs is nothing but shields by a different name. The more things that can go wrong underneath - the more I feel like I'm driving a very complex robotic war machine with very complex mechanics and dynamics - and the less I feel like I'm driving an walking origami with halfway decent shields.

[DEVASTATOR]

Listless Nomad, on 19 January 2012 - 10:22 AM, said:

This was described numerous times in the novels and makes a lot of sense. I vote wholeheartedly for this. Too many times it feels like "armor" on mechs is nothing but shields by a different name. The more things that can go wrong underneath - the more I feel like I'm driving a very complex robotic war machine with very complex mechanics and dynamics - and the less I feel like I'm driving an walking origami with halfway decent shields.

That's what we had with the "critical hit" system in MW2. You could do serious damage to a mechs engine, slowing it down a lot, without killing it. Shoot some armor off and your next shot takes out an engine crit which affects performance (or shoot out an ECM module) but doen't yet kill it.

[Dlardrageth]

Liam, on 18 January 2012 - 02:33 PM, said:

[...]So some parts of machine should be cooled or prevented from undesired heat fluxes to hold these parts under specific temperature so you would like to place them with highest heat resistance to the hot parts.
Some parts are intended to have highest heat conductivity to allow the highest heat transfer and then heat dissipation with heat sink with heat convection (or radiation ...)[...]

I wonder what role the reactor/weapon ratio might play with regards to "local cooling". We do have a somewhat simplified system that states "Weapon X does Y heat on firing). Okay, fine. But how much of that heat is build up locally in/around the weapon, and how much of all that heat is built up in/around the reactor? What if the ratio is highly biased towards the reactor, something like 80/20?

Thus the "localized" cooling effect requiring local heat sinks might be only half of it. Who is to say that the majority of heat sinks are not used to cool the "reactor part" of the total heat buildup in this scenario? Which would basically require them to be in torso locations...